Prev: Can't install hpricot gem
Next: fastest readline method
From: Josh Cheek on 11 Feb 2010 16:45
[Note: parts of this message were removed to make it a legal post.]

On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 5:53 PM, Marnen Laibow-Koser <marnen(a)marnen.org>wrote:

> If you need to ask the mailing list a question like this, then you are
> not ready to be writing Ruby tutorials. Sorry, but that's the way it
> is.
> Best,
>

I'm not sure that this is true. Sometimes, when the person writing the
tutorial has a very firm commanding of the subject matter, they gloss over
the kinds of things that trip up newbies. To someone well versed in Ruby,
exit is so obvious that they probably don't think to address it.

I was tutoring a student at my school for "Problem Solving and Programming
in C" (CS211, first programming course) and he was struggling with things
like figuring out where his files were, simple syntax, understanding
prototypes, understanding that functions can't see eachother's data. Things
I would not have focused on if I were writing a tutorial, things the course
probably gave a cursory explanation to.

When you are just starting out with something, you have a steep slope ahead
of you, and only after you climb over it will you have the foundation of
knowledge necessary to understand most of the available resources.

I'm trying to learn Clojure right now, and getting started was very
frustrating, there were things the Clojure book just says, that I needed
specific steps and examples for, but the author thought that just telling me
to do something was enough. So I had to do a lot of work and a lot of
digging, and consider quitting several times, because the perspective of the
author was so different from my perspective.

So I think there may be a case for tutorials for newbies by newbies, because
the things that trip up the tutorial's author are the kinds of things the
author is going to emphasize, and these are much more likely to be the kinds
of things that the readers will also be struggling with. When you don't know
anything, and you figure something out for the first time, you know
firsthand what the hurdles are for someone in your situation, and so if your
readers are in that same situation, then the tutorial's subject matter, and
emphases are more relevant to them.

This is my hypothesis. It might be useful to have Charlie ask some of the
people he is writing the tutorial for to use a different tutorial by someone
with more knowledge, and see how effective each was (ie gather some
empirical data to test the hypothesis).

From: Marnen Laibow-Koser on 11 Feb 2010 17:14
Josh Cheek wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 5:53 PM, Marnen Laibow-Koser
> <marnen(a)marnen.org>wrote:
>
>> If you need to ask the mailing list a question like this, then you are
>> not ready to be writing Ruby tutorials. Sorry, but that's the way it
>> is.
>> Best,
>>
>
> I'm not sure that this is true. Sometimes, when the person writing the
> tutorial has a very firm commanding of the subject matter, they gloss
> over
> the kinds of things that trip up newbies. To someone well versed in
> Ruby,
> exit is so obvious that they probably don't think to address it.

Quite true. I certainly didn't know the answer off the top of my head
-- but I *knew where to look it up*. My point -- which perhaps I should
have made more clearly was that the OP didn't know the answer, and
apparently didn't know where to look for the answer. That pretty
clearly says to me that the OP should not be creating tutorials.
>
> I was tutoring a student at my school for "Problem Solving and
> Programming
> in C" (CS211, first programming course) and he was struggling with
> things
> like figuring out where his files were, simple syntax, understanding
> prototypes, understanding that functions can't see eachother's data.
> Things
> I would not have focused on if I were writing a tutorial, things the
> course
> probably gave a cursory explanation to.
>

Yeah. But I don't think this is the same sort of situation.

> When you are just starting out with something, you have a steep slope
> ahead
> of you, and only after you climb over it will you have the foundation of
> knowledge necessary to understand most of the available resources.
>
> I'm trying to learn Clojure right now, and getting started was very
> frustrating, there were things the Clojure book just says, that I needed
> specific steps and examples for, but the author thought that just
> telling me
> to do something was enough. So I had to do a lot of work and a lot of
> digging, and consider quitting several times, because the perspective of
> the
> author was so different from my perspective.
>
> So I think there may be a case for tutorials for newbies by newbies,
> because
> the things that trip up the tutorial's author are the kinds of things
> the
> author is going to emphasize, and these are much more likely to be the
> kinds
> of things that the readers will also be struggling with. When you don't
> know
> anything, and you figure something out for the first time, you know
> firsthand what the hurdles are for someone in your situation, and so if
> your
> readers are in that same situation, then the tutorial's subject matter,
> and
> emphases are more relevant to them.
>
> This is my hypothesis. It might be useful to have Charlie ask some of
> the
> people he is writing the tutorial for to use a different tutorial by
> someone
> with more knowledge, and see how effective each was (ie gather some
> empirical data to test the hypothesis).

Best,
-- 
Marnen Laibow-Koser
http://www.marnen.org
marnen(a)marnen.org
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From: Seebs on 11 Feb 2010 17:41
On 2010-02-11, Josh Cheek <josh.cheek(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> So I think there may be a case for tutorials for newbies by newbies,

The problem is that the newbies will often figure things out *incorrectly*,
leading to tutorials that teach people bad habits, or superstitions, or
whatever.

That said, you raise a good point about tutorials in general -- it's extremely
hard to write a good introductory text for something you know extremely well.

Tragically, as of yet, it has proven impossible for anyone to try showing a
document to prospective readers to ask for feedback, but we hope that some
day this technology will be developed and it will be possible to improve
documents based on that kind of feedback.

-s
--
Copyright 2010, all wrongs reversed. Peter Seebach / usenet-nospam(a)seebs.net
http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!
From: Marnen Laibow-Koser on 11 Feb 2010 18:03
Seebs wrote:
> On 2010-02-11, Josh Cheek <josh.cheek(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> So I think there may be a case for tutorials for newbies by newbies,
>
> The problem is that the newbies will often figure things out
> *incorrectly*,
> leading to tutorials that teach people bad habits, or superstitions, or
> whatever.
>
> That said, you raise a good point about tutorials in general -- it's
> extremely
> hard to write a good introductory text for something you know extremely
> well.

Yes indeed! And skilled newcomers could play an important role here.

>
> Tragically, as of yet, it has proven impossible for anyone to try
> showing a
> document to prospective readers to ask for feedback, but we hope that
> some
> day this technology will be developed and it will be possible to improve
> documents based on that kind of feedback.

Wikis?

>
> -s

Best,
-- 
Marnen Laibow-Koser
http://www.marnen.org
marnen(a)marnen.org
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From: Albert Schlef on 11 Feb 2010 19:16
Seebs wrote:
> On 2010-02-11, Josh Cheek <josh.cheek(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> So I think there may be a case for tutorials for newbies by newbies,
>
> The problem is that the newbies will often figure things out
> *incorrectly*,
> leading to tutorials that teach people bad habits, or superstitions, or
> whatever.

There's one point people here missed:

He said we was going to *write* a tutorial. This doesn't necessarily
mean that he was going to *publish* it.

Many people enjoy writing articles. To increase his motivation when
learning a subject, such a person accompanies his studying with writing
an essay or tutorial or something. This purposeful writing does
something to their mind. It makes them feel good.

I myself have written several "micro" tutorials on various subjects,
while learning. I've never published them because once I finished
studying the subject these tutorials have served their purpose (and they
never were polished enough for public consumption). I actually know in
advance my "tutorials" aren't good enough and won't "see the light of
day", but this writing is part of the experience. Every means is
legitimate.
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: Can't install hpricot gem
Next: fastest readline method